StreetLamp

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Mona Lisa. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. David Underdown 10:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Pikachumonalisa.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pikachumonalisa.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Konstable 10:06, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:A390.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:A390.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — QuantumEleven 09:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Adding nonsense

Please stop adding nonsense and silly joke images - you are just irritating people. You may be more interested in Uncyclopedia, where such stuff is more than welcome! — QuantumEleven 09:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

No.

I've been to Uncyclopedia. Fun place, but it is nowhere near as fun. The articles there are not all that great. Yes, I know they are jokes, but they are rarely good jokes. And why would I want to waste my time there? Only you can answer. StreetLamp 09:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Along a similar vein, however, why would you want to waste your time here? I can respect that you're trying to have fun, really I can, and I don't want to stop you by any means... but Wikipedia is an attempt at a serious encylopedia. Forgive any offense, but it's kind've like trying to play baseball in a school library when the playing field is just outside; you've got the whole internet to play on, and I really do encourage you to get out there and enjoy yourself wherever and however you can. If contributing to Wikipedia is fun, by all means do so, but I just ask that you try to understand why some people may not react very politely to what you or I might consider a joke, here. Thanks for your time. Regards, Luna Santin 09:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I enjoy it here. As I have said, Uncyclopedia is not fun at all, and itsn't really that funny. It's full of the worst vandals making horrible attempts to be funny. I love joke articles, when they do make sense while being silly/rediculous. Wikipedia, however, is great. I understand (and expect) for my edits to be reverted. But at least some of the vandals here are entertaining. Further, any vandalism here will be reverted within 15 minutes, so it's not that huge of a deal. -StreetLamp 05:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Thank you for experimenting with the page George W. Bush on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --james^(talk) 10:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to George W. Bush. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. KOS | talk 11:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)